Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Software Microsoft

SoftMaker Office 2008 vs. OpenOffice.org 3.1 214

snydeq writes "InfoWorld's Randall Kennedy examines would-be Microsoft Office competitors SoftMaker Office and OpenOffice.org and finds the results surprising. OpenOffice.org — frequently cited as the most viable Office competitor — has pushed for Office interoperability in version 3.1, adding import support for files in Office 2007's native Open XML format. But, as Kennedy found in Office-compatibility testing, that support remains mostly skin deep. 'Factor in OpenOffice's other well-documented warts — buggy Java implementation, CPU-hogging auto-update system, quirky font rendering — and it's easy to see why the vast majority of IT shops continue to reject this pretender to the Microsoft Office throne,' Kennedy writes. SoftMaker Office, however, 'shows that good things often still come in small packages.' Geared more toward mobile computing, the suite's 'compact footprint and low overhead make it ideal for underpowered systems, and its excellent compatibility with Office 2003 file formats means it's a safe choice for heterogeneous environments where external data access isn't a priority.'" Note that SoftMaker Office is not free software — it costs $79.95 — and there is no version for Macintosh.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

SoftMaker Office 2008 vs. OpenOffice.org 3.1

Comments Filter:
  • History (Score:2, Interesting)

    by googlesmith123 ( 1546733 ) on Tuesday June 30, 2009 @05:16PM (#28534921)
    One of the coolest things about german Softmaker is the software they made for the old Windows CE platforms like my old HPC ïHP Jornada 680. This included Word that could actually edit MS Word files and Excel that did something more than just display data.
  • What timing (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Rei ( 128717 ) on Tuesday June 30, 2009 @05:22PM (#28534983) Homepage

    I've been dealing with a rash of OpenOffice compatibility problems with MS Office that I hope don't cause my business plan to bomb in a local business plan competition. I've been discovering that the way it saves .doc files doesn't quite match with how MS Office reads them, so things end up misaligned - tables broken up, images out of place, etc. And don't even get me started on docx... I'm going to try to get a revised (MS Office-saved) version in, but I hope it's not too late.

  • Skin deep? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by DrXym ( 126579 ) on Tuesday June 30, 2009 @05:35PM (#28535115)
    I haven't had any trouble with any MS Office files I've thrown at OpenOffice. Granted I mostly open MS Word documents but they've all opened fine. Far more impressive to me was when I dug out an MS Office for Mac file from about 15 years ago and THAT opened in OpenOffice even though MS Word for Windows wouldn't have anything to do with it.

    So while I'm sure there are certain files which don't convert well I've been extremely happy with OpenOffice's support so far. I'm less happy about the general level of bloat and lower level of usability that comes with the product. I can't help wonder who thought it would be a great idea to toss in Python, Java, StarBasic and god knows what other runtimes into this app. There is a very cobbled together feel about the whole thing.

  • Re:What timing (Score:5, Interesting)

    by mpapet ( 761907 ) on Tuesday June 30, 2009 @05:36PM (#28535123) Homepage

    I've been discovering that the way it saves .doc files doesn't quite match with how MS Office reads them

    Hahaha!!! Microsoft is no better at retaining formatting than OpenOffice. I had one particularly wasteful work day attempting to edit a complex Word doc with embedded images, tables authored on Mac with French as the default language. We were each on different versions of Office too. The language of the document was Fr-english, so I was supposed to clean up the language a little.

    I spent Hours spent attempting to keep the document open long enough to get the information out of it before it would crash Word again. Hours!!!!!

    Do yourself and them a favor and send them a PDF. They'll think you are a big-shot with your Adobe Acrobat software and everything!!!

  • Comment removed (Score:3, Interesting)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Tuesday June 30, 2009 @05:38PM (#28535151)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • Re:What timing (Score:3, Interesting)

    by datapharmer ( 1099455 ) on Tuesday June 30, 2009 @05:47PM (#28535243) Homepage
    The proper rendering of documents is one of the main reasons PDF was created. If they require that you submit in some proprietary format that has known problems with rendering that shouldn't count against you. oh wait - its a BUSINESS competition... never mind.
  • Re:Slashvertisment (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Zantetsuken ( 935350 ) on Tuesday June 30, 2009 @06:09PM (#28535487) Homepage
    Also, they should have included Go-OpenOffice [wikipedia.org], as this is what is in most mainstream GNU/Linux distro repositories and not the vanilla OpenOffice that you download from Sun. Also, as you mentioned comparing with IBM Lotus Symphony, they should mention that it's based on the older OpenOffice 1.1.4 due to that being the last version the upstream with a particular dual license of LGLP and one of Sun's licenses...
  • Re:KOffice (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Sparr0 ( 451780 ) <sparr0@gmail.com> on Tuesday June 30, 2009 @06:20PM (#28535607) Homepage Journal

    Ditto. Or the Gnome suite (Abiword, Gnumeric, etc). Hell, I still maintain multiple installations of StarOffice. There are so many alternatives out there, but no one ever considers most of them.

  • Re:What timing (Score:3, Interesting)

    by fermion ( 181285 ) on Tuesday June 30, 2009 @06:39PM (#28535825) Homepage Journal
    This is a valid concern, but is not really an issue with the office suite. If the goal is consistent display across products, this will never happen with any office product. There is simply little incentive. Any software developer is going to want all users to use their product, at the latest version. There is almost no incentive to build interoperability outside of the proprietary suite. This is the primary reason why I stopped using MS Office. I would send stuff out, and people, who were using a more recent version, could not read my files. Since they were the customer, it was my responsibility to upgrade, but I did not have the money. The solution was to move OO.org which was more likely to be able to write files in whatever version of MS Office the customer was using.

    The issue really is the state of MS Office as a defacto standard, which really never really existed because there is no cross platform year after year guarantee that files will remain accessible. The way to insure that formating will remain constant across platform and through time, at least so far, is the PDF file. I laugh every time I get a .doc memo. I think how simple it would be to change the memo slightly, spoof the address, and get someone in trouble. MS Office security is not nearly as secure as Adobe PDF.

    Back to the subject. PDF is a better way to exchange files, as long as they do not need to be edited. MS can provide a superior solution where files are edited. HTML is also good for distribution of files. I have also taken to converting my presentations into HTML or flash. Again, I see all these presentations on the web. Change the presentation, hack, upload, frivolity ensues.

    My current situation is that I have machines that run MS Office 2003, and other runs later versions. The later versions tend to bork the 2003 files, and I will not even deal with the later version in 2003. I have OO.org installed, and if 2003 will not work I use OO.org.

  • by jonbryce ( 703250 ) on Tuesday June 30, 2009 @07:08PM (#28536169) Homepage

    You can fix the blurry text as follows:

    Right click on the document, and click "Page Display Preferences", then click on "Page Display" in the side menu, and in the "Rendering" section, select Smooth Text: "For Laptop/LCD screens".

    Adobe uses its own font rendering system rather than the one in Windows, and clear-type is not the default setting.

    If you are using the Mac, the same procedure applies except that you may have to ctrl-click if you only have one mouse button.

  • by Toonol ( 1057698 ) on Tuesday June 30, 2009 @07:11PM (#28536203)
    I'm in the process of editing a 150 page book with lots of tables and lists. About halfway through the process of writing it, I moved to OO because Word was creaking under the strain; it would glitch, it would repaginate differently from load to load, it was just unpleasant.

    Open Office has seemed much more robust in that sense. It didn't open the document without problems; I had to do extensive reformatting. If this was something I would be exchange outside my company, I would have stuck with Word. But if you're using Open Office Writer from start to end, I think it is a respectable competitor to Word. (Calc, however, isn't quite there.)
  • by Enderandrew ( 866215 ) <enderandrew&gmail,com> on Tuesday June 30, 2009 @09:33PM (#28537453) Homepage Journal

    I thought I read in some interviews when Richard Garriot was first developing games, and starting to code them in assembly, that companies were exceedingly impressed with what he was able to accomplish with limited computing power back in the day. They begged him to write a spreadsheet.

  • Re:Value (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Enderandrew ( 866215 ) <enderandrew&gmail,com> on Tuesday June 30, 2009 @09:35PM (#28537477) Homepage Journal

    I would contend taking an Office 2000/2003 user and placing them infront of Office 2007 would require extensive training, where as migrating to OOo is the easier move.

    I gave it to my mother and she can just use it.

  • Re:What timing (Score:2, Interesting)

    by JumpDrive ( 1437895 ) on Wednesday July 01, 2009 @02:34PM (#28546711)
    This is one of the reasons which got us started uninstalling 2007.

This file will self-destruct in five minutes.

Working...